敦煌吐魯番文獻展現的《孝經》今古文

Jinwen Xiaojing and Guwen Xiaojing in Dunhuang and Tulufan Documents

唐代以後《孝經》今古文異同見於傳世諸本，本文以敦煌吐魯番《孝 經》諸本與傳世諸本加以逐次比對，發現敦煌吐魯番諸本中，各寫卷多有 呈現今古文字體混在的狀況，學者指摘敦煌本「古文竟無一帙之遺」似未 盡然。藉由比對結果，結合歷代藝文書誌記述重加梳理，發現梁陳隋唐之 際原本十八章《鄭注》與二十二章《孔傳》在學官的兩家分立，伴隨十八 章《御注》取代《鄭注》、《孔傳》作為國子學「今文」的確立，加上朱熹 刊改《古文孝經》的影響，宋代以後形成一種「《孝經》十八章則今文，二 十二章則古文」的混淆理解。歷代從官學至民間多元傳承的《孝經》學術 源流，遂為宋代以後《孝經》今古文並立說統整簡化。敦煌吐魯番文獻的 發現，對重新釐清六朝隋唐《孝經》學術源流，提供了第一手參證資料。

Jinwen Xiaojing and Guwen Xiaojing after Tang Dynasty are both available and widely circulated nowadays. In this paper, each version of Dunhuang and Tulufan Documents of Xiaojing was compared with the versions which are available nowadays. And it can be seen that Jinwen and Guwen both exist in the same version of Dunhuang and Tulufan Documents. According to the previous studies as well as the comparison done in this paper, Zhengzhu, which includes eighteen chapters, and Kongzhuan, which includes twenty two chapters, were lost and replaced by Yuzhu during the period from Liang Dynasty to Tang Dynasty. Yuzhu with eighteen chapters has been regarded as Jinwen Xiaojing ever since, while the version with twenty two chapters revised by Zhu Xi in Song Dynasty has been regarded as Guwen Xiaojing. Thus there have been misunderstandings that every version of Xiaojing with eighteen chapters would be Jinwen, and version with twenty two chapters would be Guwen. The assumption reduces many versions of Xiaojing to only Jinwen and Guwen ever since Song Dynasty. Based on the discovery of Dunhuang and Tulufan Documents, this paper aims to clarify the assumption on different versions of Xiaojing which began to be cierculated in Six Dynasties, Sui Dynasty and Tang Dynasty.